The actress decided to take the preventative measure after genetic testing determined that she had an 87 percent risk of breast cancer and a 50 percent risk of ovarian cancer.
Now, Jolie is a movie star married to another movie star, so the decision to undergo an expensive procedure did not deter her like it will many women in the United States.
Not the mastectomy. Insurance usually covers that if the patient presents such risks. No, the expensive procedure is the initial genetic testing. And the Supreme Court might be able to do something about that in the next couple of months…
* Who is this really protecting? Do women really need someone to tell us we can’t date this guy? Judging by an unscientific sample of good women dating assholes, kind of. [Feministing]
* Angelina’s lawyer self-deprecates; Angelina doesn’t disagree with his bone-headedness; even Jon Stewart is not immune to her charms. [Legal Profession Blog]
* ABC and Fox look the same to me right now. [BreitBart]
* If 22-year-old graduates with little (if any) teaching experience are fortunate enough to get a coveted, resume- and Ivy-worthy job with Teach for America, they will get health benefits — plus a free pass to say things like “I found my fellow teachers intelligent, caring and effective” and “I have no idea why so many low-income parents make sacrifices to send their kids to private schools” (to peers who did indeed survive public schools) — before bailing for law school. [Citizen-Times]
* And because I am grateful to live in the free world, I encourage everyone to voice his or her opinions whenever given the chance. Of course, these bloggers do so with full disclosure of their identities in the face of harsh political consequences, but we can’t help that we’re cowardly, coddled, self-obsessed risk-averse lawyers living in the U.S. [All Africa]
* It’s that time of the year, when you yet again resolve to no longer be an attorney. You have one more chance to make this same futile resolution when Chinese New Year rolls around. [The Complete Lawyer]
* Any food substance that sustains armies and people still living in Y2K bunkers deserves nothing less than a full-on defense of its rights. You go, Hormel. [Likelihood of Confusion]
* Healthy parenting or affirmative action? I We wonder if little Shiloh will turn out like that other token biological celebrity offspring, SatchelRonan Seamus (or just another needy, rich, hot girl, whose mommy never loved her). [Hot Gossip at MSN Entertainment]
* Darwinism resurfaces, and thank God, because I really hate tiny dogs. [St. Petersburg Times]
* Bonus season may be behind us, but we still have money on our minds. [May It Please the Court]
* I am open to all genres of TV shows, as you may know. But this? Almost makes me long for the days of Ally McBeal. [QuizLaw]
Angelina Jolie may soon be defending a lawsuit — and not from Jennifer Aniston alleging alienation of affection. Reuters reports:
A Cambodian charity threatened on Wednesday to sue Angelina Jolie for breach of contract, saying the Hollywood star had reneged on a promise to give $1.5 million over five years to wildlife conservation.
Some of you may recall, from first-year Contracts, that a promise to make a charitable contribution may be enforceable without consideration (under certain circumstances).
How worried should Jolie be about this possible legal action?
“I have been asking Jolie and her lawyer to give me an appropriate answer, but so far no answer,” [Cambodian Vision in Development head] Mounh Sarath told Reuters from the western town of Battambang.
“Now I give her one week and if there is still no answer I will a file suit in the local court of Battambang.”
“The local court of Battambang”? Angelina, watch out!
No, seriously. That court is probably more friendly to plaintiffs — and less sympathetic to defendants with deep pockets — than a state trial court in Mississippi.
(We have not addressed the issue of jurisdiction. But given how Angelina likes to cavort through developing nations — including but not limited to Cambodia, birthplace of her adopted son, Maddox — we think that adequte contacts exist.) Cambodian Charity Threatens Actress Jolie with Lawsuit [Reuters]
Ed. note: The Asia Chronicles column is authored by Kinney Recruiting. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates, counsels and partners in Asia than any other recruiting firm in each of the past seven years. You can reach them by email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Please note that Evan Jowers and Robert Kinney are still in Hong Kong and will stay FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS WEEK. We still have a handful of available slots for meetings with our Asia Chronicles fans. If we have not been in touch lately, reach out and let us know when we could meet! There is no need for an agenda at all. Most of our in-person meetings on these trips are with folks who understand that improving a legal practice through lateral hiring is an information-driven process that takes time to handle correctly.
Regarding trends in lateral US associate hiring in Hong Kong, we of course keep much of what we know off of this blog. Based on placement revenue, though, Kinney is having one of our most successful years ever in Asia. We are helping a number of our law firm clients with M&A, fund formation, cap markets, project finance, FCPA and disputes openings. These are very specific needs in many cases, so a conversation with us before jumping in may be helpful. As always, we like to be sure to get the maximum number of interviews per submission, using a well-informed, highly targeted, and selective approach, taking into account short, medium and long-term career aims.
Making a well informed decision during a job search is easier said than done – the information we provide comes from 10 years of being the market leader in US attorney placements at the top tier firms in Asia. There is no substitute for having known a hiring partner since he/she was an associate or for having helped a partner grow his or her practice from zip to zooming, and this is happily where we stand today – with years of background information on just about every relevant person in all the markets we serve, and most especially in Hong Kong/China/Greater Asia. So get in touch and get a download from us this week if we can fit it in, or soon in any case!
The legal industry is being disrupted at every level by technological advances. While legal tech entrepreneurs and innovators are racing to create a more efficient and productive future, there is widespread indifference on the part of attorneys toward these emerging technologies.
When the LexisNexis Cloud Technology Survey results were reported earlier this year, it showed that attorneys were starting to peer less skeptically into the future, and slowly but surely leaning more toward all the benefits the law cloud has to offer.
Because let’s face it, plenty of attorneys are perhaps a bit too comfortable with their “system” of practice management, which may or may not include neon highlighters, sticky notes, dog-eared file folders, and a word processing program that was last updated when the term “raise the roof” was still de rigueur.